Important note: This Wiki page is edited by participants of the EOWG. It does not necessarily represent consensus and it may have incorrect information or information that is not supported by other Working Group participants, WAI, or W3C. It may also have some very useful information.

Important Note: For this draft we have some tool-specific guidance. However, there are potential issues with vendor-neutraility and we might need to address this a different way — for example, moving tool-specific guidance to WebPlatform Docs or the WAI-Engage wiki where people can easily add other tools.

Introduction

previous intro:Testing and evaluating a web site for accessibility may seem intimidating but it need not be. There are simple ways to check on some basic features that do not require special skills or tools beyond your browser controls. Here you will find two approaches to doing Preliminary Evaluation of your pages. The first is a Quick Check - a list of 5 things you can do in 5 minutes. The second, while not a full conformance validation of WCAG2 Guidelines, will help ensure basic accessibility across a broader range of issues. While the second can quickly determine if the most important elements of a web page can be used by most persons with disabilities, it also requires more knowledge of accessibility principles and a few testing tools. [end previous intro]

These Easy Checks are suggested as a way for non-experts to take the accessibility temperature of their pages. They are provided to guide in the performance of some simple tests that can indicate whether or not accessibility has been considered in even the most rudimentary way. The Easy Checks are not, however, intended to be a comprehensive validation of accessibility and/or conformance to standards. For guidance on thorough measurement of such conformance, see WCAG-EM, Website Accessibility Conformance Evaluation Methodology.

As you work through each section, bear in mind that this process is meant to be quick and easy rather than definitive. This is a place to start and to build upon. Your forms, for example, may pass the quick check, but further investigation on aspects that are more difficult or time consuming to validate may reveal barriers undetected in an Easy Check. So use the Easy Checks as a first look to help you decide what steps to take next.

Practicing with the Before-After Demo (BAD)

The Before and After Demonstration (BAD) shows an inaccessible website and a retrofitted version of this same website. You can use the BAD pages to learn how to do these Easy Checks. First do the check on a good demo page ("after") to see what it should look like if accessibility is handled well. Then do the check on the corresponding bad demo page ("before") to see what it looks like when accessibility is not handled well.

Tools

Most of these checks you can do with any browser, that is, you do not need to download special tools.

However, some checks are easier if you can download tools. To keep it simple, we've included instructions for just one special tool - the Firefox Developer Toolbar, which is free. [@@ not endorsing this tool over others!] There are other useful tools available as well.

To learn how to do these checks with other tools, see [TBD either Web Platform Docs -or- WAI-Engage wiki].

FF Toolbar

[@@ how to download Firefox browser, then the Firefox Web Developer Toolbar...]

Little Background Knowledge

... designed to require not much knowledge or skill... basic browser use...

A couple things will help you understand the "why" examples below:

screen reader is ...

voice input...

...

Quick Checks

Here are 5 things you can do to quickly check for accessibility barriers on a web page:{EOWG note: Let's work on the longer section first, then decide what we can move up to the quick checks section later.

First thing.

Second thing.

Third thing.

Fourth thing.

Fifth thing.

Once you have taken this quick dip you may be ready to dive a bit deeper. The next section provides more context and additional things you can do to check for accessibility barriers.

A Deeper Look

If you are interested in a more comprehensive look at the page(s), here more tests that require a little more time, skills, and/or tools.

[Sharron -- I moved your text to the Introduction :-]

{Editors reminder: A template for the check draft items is at the top of the discussion tab.}

Check image text alternatives ("alt text")

[updated 18 January]

Text alternatives ("alt text") convey the purpose of an image. They are used by people who cannot see the image. (For example, people who are blind and use screen readers can hear the alt text read out; people who have turned off images to speed download or save bandwidth can see the alt text.)

The text should be functional and provide an equivalent user experience, not necessarily describe the image. (For example, appropriate text alternative for a search button ([@@/WAI/images/search-icon.png]) would be "search", not "magnifying glass".)

Automated tests can tell you if alt text is missing. To determine if the alt text is appropriate , you need to see the image and judge it in context.

[+/-]To check appropriate alt text any browser: [visual]

Type the website address in the box after "Enter the URL of the web site you want to evaluate:"

Click the "WAVE this page!" button.Your web page will show up in the browser with lots of little icons on it.

Look for the red icon [@@image]. It is next to any image that is missing alt text.

Look for the green alt icon [@@image]. Next to it is text on a light blue background; the alt text is inbetween the astericks (*). See if that text adequately conveys the information in the image it is next to, per the Tips below.

Tips:

What is appropriate alt text?

The text conveys the same meaning as the image. That is, if someone cannot see the image, they get the important information from the image in the alt text. It depends on the context. For example, for an image of a dog on a kennel club website, the alt text might include the breed of the dog; however, for the same image that is just decorative on a dog park website, the image might not need any alt text at all.

If the image is not important — for example, it is just decoration — it should have null alt text (alt="").

The alt text does not need to include "button", "link", or "image of".

If there is text in the image — for example, it is an ad with a picture — the text from the image should be included in the alt text.

If the image has complex information — such as charts or graphs — the image should have a short alt text, and then the detailed description of the inforamtion should be provided elsewhere.

In HTML: Alt is an attribute of the image tag, and other tags. It looks like this in markup: <img alt="WAI logo" src="/wai/logo.png">

[+/-]To try it with BAD with FF toolbar: [visual]

Open www.w3.org/WAI/demos/bad/before/home in Firefox.

In the toolbar, select "Images", then "Display Alt Attributes". [@@image] Or, with the keyboard: [@@keyboard shortcut]
The alt text will be displayed before the images.

Missing alt: @@

Appropriate alt text: Near the top right, see the W3C image and before it: alt="W3C logo".

Inappropriate alt text:

Inappropriate alt text: See the alt text near the top starting with "alt="Red dot with...". That description is too detailed and not important.

At the bottom of the middle column, see the image of text: "(1)269C-H-O-K-E". The alt is 123456789, which is not equivalent.

Learn more from:

EOWG notes - importance: HIGH.
5min: yes, at least the easy part.
15min: yes. might want additional checks here.
Without visual rendering: can check that description exist, can check that they are not too verbose, can check that they are appropriate to the general content of the page, but not necessarily appropriate to a specific image.

Check headings

[updated 18 Jan]

Web pages often have sections of information separated by visual headings, for example, heading text is bigger and bolder (like "Check headings" right above this sentence :-). To make these work for all users, the headings need to be "marked up" in the web page "code" (e.g., HTML). That way people can navigate to the headings - including people who cannot use a mouse and use only the keyboard, and people who use a screen reader.

Heading levels should have a meaningful hierarchy, e.g.:

Heading Level 1 <h1>

Heading Level 2 <h2>

Heading Level 3 <h3>

Heading Level 3 <h3>

Heading Level 2 <h2>

Heading Level 3 <h3>

Heading Level 4 <h4>

Heading Level 4 <h4>

Heading Level 2 <h2>

What to check for:

Are there headings marked up?

Is the hierarchy meaningful? (Ideally the page starts with an "h1" — which is usually similar to the page title — and does not skip levels; however, this is not an absolute requirement.)

Is there text that looks like headings but is not marked up as a heading?

Is there text that is marked up as headings that is not really a section heading?

Is there anything there? If there is no text between "Below is an outline for this document, automatically generated from the heading tags (<h1> through <h6>.)" and "If this does not look like a real outline..." it means there are no headings marked up on the page.

Does the outline start with [H1] and follow a logical structure? (That's not required, but strongly suggested.)

Visual checks: Compare the Document Outline to the visual rendering of the page.

Are the things that look like headings on the page listed in the Document Outline?

Are there things in the Document Outline that aren't really headings?

[+/-]To check appropriate headings:[FF toolbar][visual]

Open the web page you are checking.

In the toolbar, select "Outline", then "Show Element Tags Names When Outlining". [@@image] Or, with the keyboard: [@@keyboard shortcut]

In the toolbar, select "Outline", then "Outline Headings". [@@image] Or, with the keyboard: [@@keyboard shortcut]The headings will be outlined and <h1>, <h2>, etc. icons will be before the headings.

Anything that is a functional heading should have a heading icon before it.

Anything that is a not functional heading should not have a heading icon before it.

OPEN: Does BAD have example of text that is marked up as a heading but should not be?

EOWG notes - importance: HIGH.
5min: maybe. fairly easy to check if there are at least some headings.
15min: yes.
Without visual rendereing: can check headings exist and make sense, but can't tell that all headings are styled appropriately or that text styled as a heading is marked up as one.

Check keyboard access, labels, content order, visual focus

Many people do not use the mouse and rely on the keyboard to interact with the Web. This requires keyboard access to all functionality, including links, form controls, input, and other user interface components. While screen reader users rely on the keyboard, they are not the only ones. In addition, sighted users with mobility impairments may rely on the keyboard or have assistive technologies that are controlled through keyboard actions. Therefore, key components of effective keyboard access include visible focus indication and a logical tab order.

What To Do

Click in the address bar, then put your mouse aside and don't use it.

Press the 'tab' key to move around the page.

Use the keyboard to set the focus to all focusable elements on the page.

What To Look For

Can you tab to all the elements, including links, form fields, buttons, and media player controls? Are there any actions you can't get to (e.g., if they are only available on mouse hover)?

Does the tab order follow the logical reading order, top to bottom, left to right in sequence?

Does the focus get stuck anywhere - that is, you can tab into a control but not out? (called a "keyboard trap")?

Does the order that items get focus make sense to sighted users? (e.g., you don't jump around the page out of order logically)

Can you tab right through to the bottom of the page and then resume again from the top? (e.g. you don't get stuck anywhere and can't move on)

If there is a drop-down box (for example, for navigating to a different page): If you tab into the drop-down box, can you use the down/up arrow keys to move through the options, and @@use 'tab' to the following item@@? (Make sure it doesn't automatically select the first item.)

Visually examine progress through elements and verify that the focus indicator is clearly visible (i.e. you can see where you've 'tabbed' to).

Common failures occur when the default focus indicator is turned off in CSS or when the element is styled with borders that occlude the focus indicator.

Verify that any visual changes that occur with mouse hover also are triggered with keyboard focus

Notes

Mac browsers by default only tab through forms, will need to turn on...

not work easily in Opera...

...

Check page title

EOWG notes - importance: medium.
5min: maybe not. it is easy to check, but a little more complicated to explain what makes a good title. Also not the most vital to lots of users.
15min: probably.
Without visual rendering: can check

@@ add image showing only a few words with multiple tabs in browser...

Page titles are the first information read by a screen reader; useful for when users have multiple web pages opens, e.g., on different tabs and go between different windows. (Also good for adding to bookmarks & also search engine results.)

What to do

Choose a browser that displays page titles

Look at the browser's window title bar.

Look at titles of other pages within the site.

What to look for

Verify that the title indicates the specific page and website and distinguishes the current page from others in the set of pages.

Make sure that every page in the site does not have the same title.

Check that the specific page title is listed BEFORE the name of the website. (for example, About Us - Our Long Web Site Name)

Check color contrast

Good contrast between the text and background is very important to people with visual impairments and older people who experience loss of contrast sensitivity. This includes the default black text on white background as well as colour combinations.

Some users may have requirements for very high or very low contrast, or a particular colour combination and they may choose to vary your colour choice by using their own preferred style sheet.

Remember that not all users will have high resolution screens and subtle colour combinations may not be rendered properly if the user is using a reduced colour set.

Screen reader users will hear the text even if the contrast is poor, or deliberately hidden as white on white or black on black!

First stage: What to do

Inspect the text in the main content, menu tabs, links and selected links and in buttons, labels and captions.

Common failures

Look out for instances of pale text that might blend into the background eg grey on the default off-white background. Other common combinations are light green, yellow or blue text on the default background or a background that is a slightly darker shade of the same colour.

Look for instances of dark colours on a dark background eg purple, red or dark blue on black

Any suspect instances need to be investigated further.

Second stage: What to do

A number of on-line tools can be used to compare the exact ratio of text and background. There are two types:

A lexical tool can test the declared colour values set in the style sheet and provide a report on contrast. This is useful for checking across the whole website

list named tools

A live online colour analyser allows you to select samples of the text and background colours for analysis. Use zoom to increase the font size and follow the tool instructions to pick up a sample of the text colour and a sample of the background colour. If the background is patterned take a sample at different points.

list named tools

Common failures

The contrast ratio for normal sized text is less than the minimum recommendation of 4.5:1

The contrast ration for large, bold text such as a page heading level set at 150% (1.5ems) is less than the minimum recommendation of 3:1

Notes

There are some exceptions such as large text passing at 3:1 ratio, and special requirements to achieve full conformance. The understanding document contains detailed information on text size that would be useful in understanding text resize.

<insert from Wayne Dick>

There are two types of color contrast testers: The first type, a
lexical evaluator, looks at styles in web page code and
computes color contrasts based on coded values. The second type,
run time tester, simply allows the user to sample what is on the
screen and computes contrast based on samples.

The lexical evaluator examines what the author declares. It
gives a full page report based color contrasts declared by the
programmer. These tests are quick and efficient. They break down
when run time values change due to actions taken by active
content.

The run time tester requires more hands on work. The evaluator
can take samples as the web site runs and determine actual
contrasts. The problem here is that as contrasts change over time
the tester must sample many states of the page.

Both types of test are important. If any active content changes
color during run time then WAI advises run time testing. Lexical
testing can be very useful and save time with items with static
color.

<end Wayne's insert>{thanks-you, Suzette}

[Yesterday's version
First pass - I'm working on this:

Good colour contrast between the text and background is very important to people with visual impairements. Some users may chose to vary your colour choice by using their own preferred style sheet.

Screen reader users will hear the text even if the contrast is poor, or deliberately hidden as white on white or black on black!

First stage - look out for instances of pale text that might blend into the background eg grey on the default off-white background. Other common combinations are pale green, yellow or blue text on a background of a slightly darker shade of the same colour. Check the text in the main content, menu tabs, links and selected links and in buttons, labels and captions. Any suspect instances need to be investigated.

Remember that not all users will have high resolution screens and subtle colour combinations may not be rendered properly if the user is using a reduced colour set.

Second stage - a number of on-line tools can be used to compare the exact ratio of text and background. Use zoom to increase the font size and follow the tool instructions to pick up a sample of the text colour and a sample of the background colour. If the background is patterned take a sample at different points. The minimum contrast (level AA) is 4.5:1.]

Comments 2012-Nov-30

Shawn: Definite yes

Video, Sound, (multimedia)

EOWG notes.
5min: maybe. vital for some uses, through maybe not really easy to check thoroughly
15min: yes.
Without visual rendering: can check for presense of alt content, but not quality

What to do

Follow the steps for keyboard access to ensure that the media player controls are labeled and operable by all users.

Play the audio content

Play the video content

Toggle closed captions on (if available)

Toggle audio description on (if available)

If no captions or audio description options are provided, check page for transcript or link to transcript

What to look for

Captions:

Verify that captions are synchronized to the spoken content

Ensure they are accurate and complete and that no content is omitted.

Verify that they are properly formed with correct spelling, sentence structure, and punctuation.

Make sure that audio content other than dialogue is included (music, relevant ambient sounds, etc)

Audio Description

(Judgement call) Watch the video content to verify that audio description is needed for complete understanding.

If needed, verify that they are provided in a separate track that can be toggled on and that they provide context for those who do not see the video.

Transcript: As a fall-back when captions and audio descriptions are not provided, check to see if there is text-based content that contains dialogue, any other audio content, and any necessary description of video content. Check for spelling and accuracy.

Check forms

Note: Some aspects will be integrated with keyboard access, visual focus, content order.

Forms are everywhere on the web and successful user interaction relies on clear, understandable, and accessible form controls. Several principles of accessibility should be kept in mind when testing forms. Labels for form controls, input, and other user interface components must be provided. Many people do not use the mouse and rely on the keyboard to interact with the Web. This requires visible keyboard access to all functionality, including form controls. Forms may be confusing or difficult to use for many people, and, as a result, they may be more likely to make mistakes. Clear recovery mechanisms must be provided.

Forms - simplified

[Edited by Suzette, is this sufficiently simplified?]

Note: Some aspects of Forms will be integrated with keyboard access, visual focus, content order. {SK - Also have removed references to colour coding and graphics/non text content and CAPTCHA.}

Forms are everywhere on the web and successful user interaction relies on clear, understandable, and accessible form controls. Forms are complex and need in depth assessment.

Some critical elements which can affect screen reader users are much easier to detect using an automatic tool to check the HTML and CSS, or as a user trial with an experienced screen reader user.

The following visual checks can identify some common problems which are particularly important when testing forms.

{There 10 Success criteria references are included to help editorial choices – is this too many? SK}

Labels for form controls, input, and other user interface components must be provided. (Labels and Instructions 3.3.2 A)

Keyboard access for people who do not use the mouse and rely on the keyboard to interact with the Web. This requires visible keyboard access to all functionality, including form controls. (Keyboard 2.1.1 A, No keyboard trap 2.1.2 A, Focus visible 2.4.7 AA)

Information needs to be in a logical order which is followed when tabbing through the input fields. (Meaningful sequence 1.3.2 A, Focus order 2.4.3 A)

Error correction: Forms may be confusing or difficult to use for many people, and, as a result, they may need more time and be more likely to make mistakes. Clear recovery mechanisms must be provided. (Error identification 3.3.1 A, Error suggestion 3.3.3.AA, Error prevention (legal, financial, data) 3.3.4 AA. Timing 2.2.1 A)

Are there any forms

Check through the web pages to look for examples of forms.

What to look for:

Forms include registration forms, contact forms, booking and purchase details which include text entry fields, radio buttons, dropdown boxes and submit buttons and also single text entry boxes such as login or search box.

Visually examine the instructions for the form and input fields

Check over each form.

What to look for:

Are there text instructions at the beginning of the form including if any elements are essential?

Are there text labels (before/after?) the input fields that describe what to do and if any elements are essential

{Exclude? If required fields are indicated by use of color cues, ensure that additional, alternative methods are also used – Use of colour 1.4.1 A)

Keyboard access

Use the Tab key to move through form controls, text boxes, radio buttons, drop down box and submit button. (Use shift tab to go back). Use the cursor (arrow) keys to access selection box content.

What to look for:

Is the focus visible on all form controls, including inputs, submit mechanisms, and check boxes and radio buttons?

If the form control is a check box or radio button, ensure that focus indication includes form label as well as the actual control (SK –can you do this visually?)

If the form control is a select box, ensure that arrow keys can move focus between select options and that selection is made by user action and not by default focus. (SK – can you do the second part of this visually?)

Logical sequence

Compare the sequence of information presented visually with the tab through order.

Notes

[can be internal notes for now or maybe will be included in final doc]

...

Is it possible to have a 'first glance' option to identify potential trouble spots and very common problems, which can then be examined in more depth? {Suzette}

I have noticed some developers having trouble with single fields such as search boxes or login details, or simple little contact forms - perhaps we could expand the opening description to suggest looking for these. It is not just dedicated forms such as membership details, job applications, tax returns, travel booking and shopping etc.{Suzette}

Comments 2012-Nov-30

Shawn: Maybe, a couple of things are easy, some are complex. We could use the nice writeup somewhere else if not used here.
Suzette: I can try and pick the easy bits out of Sharron's content to see if we can get this in.
Shawn: Or add notes on forms to Keyboard Access and Visible Focus sections.

People with mild to moderate visual impairments may need to enlarge text in order to read it, or read it without straining. This simple requirement is mostly achieved by the functionality of the browser and ensuring that the page design supports that functionality.

The text should be resizable up to 200% without losing information, using a standard browse. Additionally any images of text should also be resizable or replaced with actual text.

Most modern browsers now offer a zoom function which enlarges both text and other content together. Some older browsers do not resize text if it was set using fixed units – such as points or pixels.

What to do

Open your preferred browsers. Internet Explorer, Firefox, Chrome and Opera all offer zoom as a function of View or Function menus, or as a keyboard shortcut (usually, Control +, or for Mac Command +).

Set the screen window to full width

Use the zoom function or keyboard shortcut repeatedly to step up to a 200% increase.

Look at the main content, buttons, tabs and text entry fields and field labels.

Repeat with a different browser.

Common failures

Is the default body text unusually small?

Does the main heading and body text increase in size?

Has any text that is part of a control, button, menu item or label increased in size?

Does any text overflow its space – for example, the text is too big for the button or menu tab, or width or depth of the column?

Can you read to the end of the line, or does some text disappear off the screen so that you have to scroll right to the end of the line?

Note

Some browsers can expand the text beyond 200% - this is not covered by the resize requirement as it is recognised that this will cause some of the failures described. It is also accepted that some horizontal scrolling may be necessary but see also 1.4.8 which is a AAA requirement.
Users with more severe visual impairments who need larger text are likely to use screen magnifiers to increase text size above 200%.

Comments 2012-Nov-30

Notes for discussion

Text can be resized without assistive technology up to 200 percent in a way that does not require the user to scroll horizontally to read a line of text on a full-screen window.

Do we need to spell out the difference between zooming and resizing? Is resizing still important for people who use style sheets?

Do we still need to worry about IE6 which didn’t resize fixed font sizes?

Browsers are now hiding their menus – eg under the cogwheel icon, which is making it harder to know where to find the zoom option, however they seem to be reasonably consistent on keyboard shortcuts. Other options include pinch and zoom on trackpad or intellimouse

Comments 2012-Nov-30

There are two things to test:

Does text enlarge;

Don't controls remain accessible and content not overlap;

Shawn: This is a maybe, conflicting views in forums and a hot topic, might be complicated to test.

More Thorough Evaluation

or: Next Steps

or: Beyond Easy Checks

or:...

@@ point to WCAG-EM overview

Contributors

Thanks to:

Those who edited in December and January: Suzette, Sharron, Shawn, ...

Ian, Suzette, Vicki, Sylvie, Helle, Shawn for working on an early draft at the f2f in Nov.

Sharron for help making all the drafts and versions less confusing.

Wayne and Ian for sharing colleagues' related work.

Denis for edits to the old page content.

Important Note: For this draft we have some tool-specific guidance. However, there are potential issues with vendor-neutraility and we might need to address this a different way — for example, moving tool-specific guidance to WebPlatform Docs or the WAI-Engage wiki where people can easily add other tools.